Adding fedora docs

[aserio]

No description provided.

[justwagle]

@aserio shouldnt this be sudo dnf install gcc-c++ cmake boost-build ...... instead of sudo dnf gcc-c++ install ..... ? on line 18

[sithhell]

I would like to revert that again. I am opposed to that patch, I don't want to have documentation for a specific Linux distribution. Especially since this patch doesn't include all options and partially misses information.

[hkaiser]

I would like to revert that again. I am opposed to that patch, I don't want to have documentation for a specific Linux distribution.

This PR was open for over half a year. That should have been sufficient time to comment...

Especially since this patch doesn't include all options and partially misses information.

Could we add the missing information instead? I don't think that system specifics are a bad thing to have in the docs.

[sithhell]

I actually did comment on this PR, outside of github but comments have been
made.

Could we add the missing information instead? I don't think that system specifics are a bad thing to have in the docs.

Well, we do have a generic way to install HPX on any Linux system. Anything
else should go on the wiki. We can't even maintain those docs appropriately
because we neither test it nor have a fedora system to develop on.

[aserio]

@diehlpk Do you have an opinion on this. These are your changes

[hkaiser]

@sithhell If you commented on this, then I was not aware of it (or I just don't remember), sorry. My goal was to get PRs integrated (somebody has to do that, right?), there was no negative comment on the PR, the PR looked reasonable after addressing the one comment, so I went ahead.

However, please feel free to create a PR to revert the changes, we can discuss things over there.

[sithhell]

In addition, out changed the version to rc1

[sithhell]

I actually had a quote long discussion with aserio, where we decided to have it open until someone creates the wiki entry for it... Next time, I'll create a ticket or make the comment to the PR directly.

[hkaiser]

The version is unchanged:

hpx/hpx/config/version.hpp

Line 41 in 9c7a433

#define HPX_VERSION_TAG "-trunk"

. I have no idea why the diff is showing this.

[diehlpk]

I strongly recommend to have a installation even for a specific distribution at the documentation or the wiki. My blog post was helpful for my gsc student to set up HPX. My students used it and some people who asked in the irc channel.

[sithhell]

Am 02.05.2016 8:48 vorm. schrieb "Patrick Diehl" notifications@github.com:

I strongly recommend to have a installation even for a specific
distribution at the documentation or the wiki. My blog post was helpful for
my gsc student to set up HPX. My students used it and some people who asked
in the irc channel.

Sure, it's helpful to have such a receipt. Will you maintain, test and
support it?

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub

[diehlpk]

Yes, I could do it for Fedora. I usually update my system shortly after the release of the latest Fedora and have to compile it again. Thus, I could update the wiki.